Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Section 83w criminal procedure ordinance

Legal area

Court

17 Jun 2016

HKSAR v. SHAHID IMRAN YOUNAS

Citation

HKSAR v. SHAHID IMRAN YOUNAS
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC229/2015

Rule 74 applies to the renewal procedure under rule 42; the Court had power to waive the applicant's non-compliance with the 14 day limit because the delay was not wilful; the Court granted an extension to permit renewal but, on the merits, the renewed application for leave to appeal the sentence was without merit and was refused; given the stark lack of merit the Court exercised s83W(1) to disallow two months of custody time from reckoning against the sentence.
11 Jul 2014

HKSAR v. MOHAMMAD FAROOQ

Citation

HKSAR v. MOHAMMAD FAROOQ
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC406/2013

The renewed out‑of‑time application for leave to appeal against sentence is dismissed because the proposed grounds are unmeritorious: the sentencing judge rightly adopted a 3‑year starting point for attempted domestic burglary, properly assessed mitigation and prior convictions, and there are no substantial grounds to disturb the sentence; however the court exercised its s83W power to disallow 6 weeks of custody pending appeal because the applicant persisted after receiving a loss‑of‑time warning.
27 Feb 2014

HKSAR v. HUNG WAI YIP

Citation

HKSAR v. HUNG WAI YIP
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC51/2011

The leave application was dismissed as wholly without merit and the allegations of counsel incompetence were baseless; accordingly the court validly exercised its power under s83W to exclude six weeks of custody from reckoning as part of the sentence; no costs order was made due to insufficient evidence as to the applicant's or his family's ability to meet the respondent's costs.
23 Jun 2005

HKSAR v. CHEUNG TAK MOON

Citation

HKSAR v. CHEUNG TAK MOON
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC8/2005

The court accepted the trial evidence that the applicant was seen with the packet, dropped it, remained silent and the packaging was consistent with trafficking; that evidence produced an overwhelming inference of guilt eliminating any basis for leave to appeal, and therefore the application was dismissed; separately the court exercised its power under s83W CPO to exclude 2 months of custody time.
22 Apr 2005

HKSAR v. SO CHI MAN

Citation

HKSAR v. SO CHI MAN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC306/2004

Where a defendant's account is highly improbable or manifestly implausible the sentencing judge may reject it without a Newton hearing; the judge did so after viewing the interview and properly applied the 12-year starting point with plea discount, so the appellate court dismisses the application for leave to appeal.
4 Dec 2003

HKSAR v. LOK CHI SHING

Citation

HKSAR v. LOK CHI SHING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC72/2003

Leave to appeal out of time was refused because the applicant's delay was unjustified and the application lacked merit; the original aggregate sentence of eight years imprisonment was appropriate and is upheld; the Court exercised s.83W discretion to order that three months of time served pending the application shall not be counted towards the sentence.
29 Apr 2003

HKSAR v. NG WAI HING

Citation

HKSAR v. NG WAI HING
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC621/2002

The Court upheld the conviction because the trial judge was entitled to accept the victim's credible identification evidence and to reject the applicant's implausible account; for sentencing the Court held burglary of a hotel room attracts at least the same starting point as burglary of domestic premises and the 3-year starting point and concurrent sentencing were not wrong in principle; the application for leave to appeal against conviction and the appeal against sentence were dismissed and three months of time served pending the application were ordered not to be reckoned under s.83W.
4 Jul 2002

HKSAR v. LO KWOK FAI DANNY

Citation

HKSAR v. LO KWOK FAI DANNY
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC241/2001

The Court upheld the trial judge's credibility findings that the informant's evidence was truthful and corroborated, concluded the applicant was party to a concluded conspiracy to defraud, found the convictions safe, dismissed the application for leave to appeal, and applied s.83W to exclude three months' pre‑sentence custody from reckoning against the three‑year sentence.